List articles

The paper considers the general doctrine of organization – A. Bogdanov’s Tectology from the standpoint of modern theories of management, entrepreneurship and competition. A. Bogdanov’s views on entrepreneurship, competition, and the source of economic initiative are studied. The author of the article tries to answer the question of how A. Bogdanov treated organizational principles in market processes, transactional relations between economic entities. The author tries to understand exactly how A. Bogdanov understood entrepreneurship and competition. For these purposes, a contextual and formal-logical content analysis of the text of A. Bogdanov’s Tectology was carried out on the key terms “entrepreneurship”, “competition”, “initiative”. The views of A. Bogdanov are compared with the modern views of representatives of the neo-Austrian economic school, the positions of scientists in the field of the theory of entrepreneurship and competition. The author comes to the conclusion that A. Bogdanov, following K. Marx, did not distinguish between the socio-economic roles and statuses of an entrepreneur and business owners, generalizing them into a single class – the bourgeoisie. The figure of an entrepreneur (individual, serial, intracompany, social) carries a threat to the very idea of the class organization of society, since an entrepreneur can belong to any class: the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, the technical intelligentsia, or the proletariat. A. Bogdanov refers the entrepreneur to the bourgeoisie, the ruling class from which organizational activity passes to the lower classes. The author of the article comes to interesting conclusions when analyzing the use of the term “competition” by A. Bogdanov. In our opinion, A. Bogdanov generally denied the term “competition” in the semantic core of the concept, arguing that this term is used in different, unrelated senses in different industries and spheres of human activity.